From Recommendations to Realities: HRJC Urges Government to Embrace UDHR Principles in Addressing Human Rights Violations of Nepal.

The decade-long internal armed conflict (1996-2006) between government forces and the Communist Party of Nepal-Maoists resulted in various gross human rights violations. Following the signing of the Comprehensive Peace Accord (CPA) on 21 November 2006, Nepal committed to conduct an investigation that occurred during the conflict and the non-occurrence of such violations in the future. With this objective, on 25 April 2014, Nepal's Parliament passed the Commission on Investigation of Disappeared Persons, Truth and Reconciliation Act of 2071 (2014), which eventually established two commissions: the Truth and Reconciliation Commission and the Commission on Investigation of Disappeared Persons in 2015. However, the Commissions have faced criticism from civil societies, international communities, victims, and victim’s groups, being labeled as "not made for the victim”. The Act has been severely criticized for not aligning with the Supreme Court's verdict and the international laws that called the country to make necessary changes in the TRC Act in 2015. With that, thousands of victims are left in a state of justice limbo.?

In international human rights norms and mechanisms, Nepal affirmed its commitment to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) on 4 February 1991. ?Notably, as the UDHR approaches its 75th Anniversary in 2023, it serves as a foundational document, inspiring subsequent international human rights treaties, principles, and declarations. ?While the UDHR itself is not legally binding, its principles significantly influenced the development of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR). This covenant, designed to safeguard civil and political rights, and its counterpart, the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR), draws upon the fundamental principles articulated in the UDHR.

Specifically, the ICCPR established a monitoring quasi-body known as the Human Rights Committee (HRC).The HRC consists of independent experts responsible for overseeing the implementation of the ICCPR. As a member of the Covenant and its first optional protocol, Nepal not only undertook to respect the rights and freedoms protected by the ICCPR, but also agreed to be bound by the decisions handed down against it by the HRC. This obligation also derives from the Nepal Constitution, which provides, that the State shall "implement international treaties, agreements to which Nepal is a party" (Constitution, Sec. 51, Para (b)(3)). Furthermore, Nepal’s Treaty Act (1990), Section 9.1.? states that it shall enforce international treaties and agreements to which it is a party as if they were the laws of the country.

To date, Nepal has undergone three reporting cycles of HRC. Nepal submitted its last state party’s report on 21 February 2012 during the second cycle. Nepal lapsed the deadline to submit the report under the third reporting cycle, set for 22 April 2018. In its concluding observations of 15 April 2014, HRC requested the Nepal government to address the impunity for gross violations committed during the conflict, ensure a fair trial, and guarantee freedom of expression, among others- which still remain unaddressed.

Furthermore, HRC has issued 29 decisions relating to cases of gross human rights violations. In each of them, it found that Nepal is responsible for gross human rights violations of the ICCPR. In particular, these decisions concern cases of torture and other forms of inhumane or degrading treatment (11 cases), extra-judicial killings (4 cases), enforced disappearance (15 cases), and sexual violence (4 cases), being specified that these cases also and simultaneously refer to cases of unfair trial and forced child labor. In 29 cases, five cases occurred post-conflict period in Nepal.

In all its decisions, the HRC made several recommendations to Nepal, including the following:

§? Regarding the decision itself:

-??Translate the decision from English to Nepali and make these decisions widely available to the public.?

§? Regarding perpetrators:

-???Open a formal, prompt, thorough and impartial investigation into the crime(s) committed in an effort to establish the facts of the case and identify the person(s) responsible;

-??Initiate criminal proceedings to ensure that the perpetrators are brought to justice.

§? Regarding victims:

-?Provide the victim and/or the victim’s family with detailed information on the results of the investigation;

- Release immediately the victim if he or she is still alive. In the event that the victim is deceased, locate, exhume, and identify his or her remains and return these to the family;

-?Make available (or reimburse) necessary services to victims to allow the rehabilitation for the harm suffered as a consequence of the violations to be as full as possible;

-?Provide victims with measures to fully recognise and repair the harm caused by the violation, including providing appropriate compensation, rehabilitation, and measures of satisfaction (such as public apologies, public memorials, guarantees of non-repetition, and changes in relevant laws and practice);

-?Ensure that victims and their families are not further victims of harassment or subjected to intimidation and other retaliatory acts in view of their search for justice;

§? Regarding guarantees for the future:

-??Take measures that publicly acknowledge the responsibility of the State and formally recognize the harm suffered by the victims and their families. Examples may include a commemoration of the victims or a public apology;

-?? Ensure that similar violations will not happen again in the future by changes to domestic legislation and reform of institutions.

-??Ensure that its domestic laws conform to the obligations it has under the ICCPR.

?Despite positive decisions on these cases, the people associated with the cases still live in injustice. ?96 individuals were affected in a total of 29 cases. Within this, only 3 victims received compensation in those instances, only 9 decisions were translated into Nepali and no victim has been provided with measures to satisfy or address the concerns of the victims.

The victims, together with HRJC, have made several efforts to seek the implementation of these decisions. Several letters have been sent to various national authorities and stakeholders and meetings have been held However, in the absence of a specific mechanism to address the international obligations arising out of treaty bodies, such as HRC, Nepal’s authorities have not been able to implement the decisions or provide a reasonable reason for their non-implementation of the decisions. On most occasions, the victims knock at the doors of different ministries but are often left without any concrete action towards the implementation. This lack of response by the authorities further entrenched impunity in Nepal. The failure to address the recommendations put forth by the HRC underscores this unfortunate reality. Consequently, Nepal must ensure justice for all victims of gross human rights violations, if Nepal is to abide by the principles set forward by the UDHR.

Today as Nepal celebrates International Human Rights Day which also marks the 75th anniversary of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, HRJC Urges to the Government for the implementation of the decisions of the United Nations Human Rights Committee (UN HRC) relating to cases of gross human rights violations in Nepal.